Prawn Closures

[traveller]

Wow Gamechanger, you sure like the way DFO manages the prawn fishery...can't imagine where you did all your research to learn to love the commercial harvest management enough to declare it a world class fishery, although the money it earns the commercial fishermen for 40 days work is probably world class.

You seem to forget that in order to build the spawner index enough to provide that world class commercial fishery in high use areas (which are the only areas most of the population with small boats can fish prawns) that DFO has closed the Recreational fishery for 5 months out of the 12 we can fish. The pulsing closures from September to January 1, which the recreational representatives openly did not agree with this year, but were mandated by DFO, represent a closure of 2 months, then comes the DFO imposed winter closure of 3 months...that makes 5 months off the water! After April we are closed for an additional week in high use areas ( Recreational reps did not agree to that this year) and then comes the intense commercial fishery....ever try to fish the high use areas during the commercial fishery? This makes for an effective 40 days of no recreational fishing...then we get to have July where often a molt makes the prawns hard to find....not really much recreational access to our common property resource if you want to fish close to home for most of us.

Spawner Index just a " ....a tool that provides an idea of where you want to be...." is a rather gratuitous description of the only tool DFO has to determine access for the different sectors...the whole DFO concept of "room" for Recreational anglers to fish after commercial closure is in fact there is a differential between the Commercial closing index value and the " conservation or base index"...but of course if you ( oops, I mean DFO ) allow the commercial fleet to fish too long, and allow the index when the commercial fleet closes to slip below, in some cases ( 30% of the time) way below the target index, all of a sudden there is no room for recreational access....but that is apparently OK, because it is just a rough target we are told...except that we are still closed on the Recreational target because it is suddenly important that we close " on target".

So what we have with our 5 months of Recreational closures is a well preserved opportunity for a full on commercial harvest in May, a harvest which takes the same year class of prawns that will become the spawners in the fall....make no mistake that the commercial do take spawners, just a few months before the spawning process begins....DFO has just decided that it is more reasonable to have the commercial fleet harvest the bulk of the coming spawning population early in the year, then preserve what few are left by the recreational closures to come because now the spawners need protection?

If spawner index is only an approximate goal, and you can't manage to it, I think you have just given us exactly the reasoning we need to really start to push for non commercial harvest areas...then we can really look at what the impact of recreational and FSC is, and should there still be conservation concerns, deal with exactly the issues that appear to be significant while providing more time on the water for our high population areas and provide a more reasonable expectation of catch...maybe the DFO claim that spawner index is not an exact tool, that they can not manage to close all the areas at or above the target index is the best support for us to have designated non commercial areas for sure!

 

[ziggy]

The commercial fishery sampling there is more frequent and they are managed to a higher spawner index compared to the rest of the coast (Alberni's the same).

Thanks for the info. Not sure I'd I'm asking the right person, so feel free to tell me it isn't. In the last couple of years there seems to have been a lot more commercial vessels targeting the Inlet, where I fish . In addition i don't believe there were early closures which makes me believe that more catch was landed? There has also seemingly been a drop in abundance after the commercial fishery closes and a longer recovery rate.
Has any thought been given to limiting the number of commercial vessels or the tonage they can extract from an area? I see later where you explained the use spawner index as just one tool. It seems to me that with a lot of vessels fishing 300 traps per day in a confined area its pretty easy to close the barn door once the horse has escaped.
Thanks

 

[KV1]

Went to Seadrift a while back and saw a yogurt 1ltr container of frozen prawns for 40 bucks. Now DFO wants to tell me they are trying to conserve prawns for "all of us".....yeah ok. If they are not going overseas like the crab this year at 50 bucks a pound certainly there is a hidden agenda somewhere as there always is. The dollars that we contribute far outweigh those the commercial fleet provides.
This is business working with corrupt government to take even more rights away from us. The government wants us to believe they are helping us what a joke. DFO is just doing their job as mandated by their masters they are not really to blame its Harper land where only the selected few can prosper.

 

[demco99]

are they planning on closing it every year during these months from now on? maybe the commercial guys will be nice enough to sell us some quota down the road?

 

[Hot Rods]

Nice to see that DFO is using the forum to explain why a kick in the teeth and a poke in the eye is in our best interests. Those of us who attended the prawn meetings on Friday, especially those who stuck around for the afternoon "bash a rec prawner" session, certainly know which side of the table GC and the DFO prawn staff sit on. They see their mandate as maximizing the commercial harvest rather than managing the public resource for the benefit of all sectors. Traveller is right. Not only are we closed down for three months, pulsed for three months, restricted to 4 traps and a daily limit, we are basically off the water during the commercial season and then wasting our time for several months after while the stocks rebuild. These are the people who are telling us we have to "manage our expectations".

The recreational prawn committee recommends everyone throw back berried prawns all year. DFO has no data on their survival rate but regardless of what GC says, you should not feel guilty about how many make it back to the bottom. The commercial sector is running over 73,000 traps on a daily basis and throwing back millions of berried prawns and an equal or greater number of undersized. We are not the bad guys here if mortality is an issue.

 

[gamechanger]

Okay guys enjoy your paranoid theories about DFO and poor me attitudes, I won't waste anymore time on this forum trying to help people understand what's going on-doesn't seem like people care. It's too bad people don't use something like this for positive things rather than a place to *****. Adios.

 

[hambone]

The more you think about these new closures the more it hurts.... What a load of bs.

This is a gift to the commercial sector disguised as a conservation based decision. Thanks DFO

 

[searun]

Okay guys enjoy your paranoid theories about DFO and poor me attitudes, I won't waste anymore time on this forum trying to help people understand what's going on-doesn't seem like people care. It's too bad people don't use something like this for positive things rather than a place to *****. Adios.

Just insert "Halibut" where any post says "Prawn" and we can recycle the whole thing in January. Its unfortunate that things degrade to making it personal. I was rather enjoying both sides of the actual issues under debate, and actually learning a few things about prawn management.

 

[traveller]

Hey Searun,

It was really just reacting to what we all saw in a meeting that started at 9:00 AM and went to 5:00 PM with continual bashing of the recreational sector in a meeting that was supposed to be chaired to an agenda and be respectful in its tone....not. This is indeed about the management of a common property resource and I really appreciate your comments about plugging in " halibut" when you see prawns...I have been saying that for three years now. Same numbers, almost....about 210 prawn licences...about 200 active commercial halibut fishermen...about the same claim on the resource from what we can determine on limited data....seems about 80% of the prawns for commercial, about 20% for the recreational. Constant meetings, detailed and thoughtful responses from SFAB, written out and presented on time according to DFO requirements for Fishing Plan consideration, and the recreational requests ignored....sure is familiar to those of us who sat through the halibut proceedings and two roundtable facilitations. Now we have winter closures announced, but were never shown the fall testing results that apparently dictated the closures....we still have not been shown the commercial harvest numbers from June....just imagine what would happen in the real corporate world not in a Government job, when the harvest numbers from a fishery of 210 people could not be prepared 6 months after it finished?

Hot Rods nailed it...this is maximizing commercial harvest for 210 people over the thousands of recreational anglers who would like to see better access that has been diminished over the last 10 years!

 

[nicnat]

so some of you fellow sporties seem to think it's ok to shut down peoples livelyhoods ( commy prawn guys) so you can fish prawns whenever you want???? i've read a lot of bs on here about the me me me crap mostly from the island regulars on here. all i can say you guys have yer heads so far up your asses it's ridiculous. you clowns have absolutely no morals or clue whatsoever, absolutely pathetic bunch of losers. had it with this board, had to bite my tongue too many times. fack you all, most of ya anyhow and you know who you are.

 

[hambone]

A bunch of selfish rec anglers.... Lol

The commercial fleet has somewhere around 250 license holders and they take on average probably 15000lbs/license every year.

Nicnat, Are you serious?

No one is shutting down their livelihoods, they make big money.

 

[quicksilver11]

Thanks for the info gamechanger is/was appreciated!!!

 

[Copper Moon]

Based on my experience (predominately 17-12), I do not believe this fishery is managed on a scientific basis. Since that great year of 2009 I have seen the commercial prawn fleet pound away in our area until they have to give up. In some earlier years, even after they deserted the area no closure was made. I think that this closure, at least in the area I am familiar with, is solely based on complaints from the commercial fleet. I wouldn't mind a total closure in the spawning season, but only if the commercial fishery was truly monitored and restricted so the results could be shared by all. Another idea that has been suggested by some is to eliminate or restrict commercial prawning in populated areas. This would eliminate a lot of the conflict between the groups.

Until DFO eliminates recreational prawning altogether

 

[ziggy]

so some of you fellow sporties seem to think it's ok to shut down peoples livelyhoods ( commy prawn guys) so you can fish prawns whenever you want???? i've read a lot of bs on here about the me me me crap mostly from the island regulars on here. all i can say you guys have yer heads so far up your asses it's ridiculous. you clowns have absolutely no morals or clue whatsoever, absolutely pathetic bunch of losers. had it with this board, had to bite my tongue too many times. fack you all, most of ya anyhow and you know who you are.

I think a lot of people here are simply questioning how DFO is managing a public resource. Its the right, in fact duty of citizens to question their governments action. I don' t believe commercial prawning needs to be shut down, but I would like to know why, for example, pulse fishing is required to protect the stock, yet the commercial fisheries don't have similar restrictions? I'd like to know if our resource is being well managed, why does it seem scarcer?
I agree with you the board should be used for a respectfull exchange of ideas, unfortuntunately some people are incapable of making a point without personal attacks or grandstanding. Those folks add little to any discussion

 

[KV1]

Based on my experience (predominately 17-12), I do not believe this fishery is managed on a scientific basis. Since that great year of 2009 I have seen the commercial prawn fleet pound away in our area until they have to give up. In some earlier years, even after they deserted the area no closure was made. I think that this closure, at least in the area I am familiar with, is solely based on complaints from the commercial fleet. I wouldn't mind a total closure in the spawning season, but only if the commercial fishery was truly monitored and restricted so the results could be shared by all. Another idea that has been suggested by some is to eliminate or restrict commercial prawning in populated areas. This would eliminate a lot of the conflict between the groups.

Until DFO eliminates recreational prawning altogether

Don't worry I am sure that is on the agenda or reducing catches, gear , areas. Just like halibut,just like salmon. We should not have access to any resources beyond the grocery store is how the government sees it. Just look at hunting restrictions to land and see what the future holds. Opens up the door for poachers.
I even heard that DFO fines don't even have to get paid unless the individual DFO officer wants to track you down which rarely happens for small fines. I would not do that but people will.

 

[JuandeOne]

so some of you fellow sporties seem to think it's ok to shut down peoples livelyhoods ( commy prawn guys) so you can fish prawns whenever you want???? i've read a lot of bs on here about the me me me crap mostly from the island regulars on here. all i can say you guys have yer heads so far up your asses it's ridiculous. you clowns have absolutely no morals or clue whatsoever, absolutely pathetic bunch of losers. had it with this board, had to bite my tongue too many times. fack you all, most of ya anyhow and you know who you are.

I totally agree with you nicnac. Take away a constitutional right to a public resource for thousands of tax paying citizens that provides a source of rercreation, wellbeing and sustenance; corruptly gift said public resource to a small group of individuals and have them sell me back a yogurt container filled with 10 prawns for $40. Come on people get your heads out of your asses!!!!!

 

[SpringFever552]

I think a lot of people here are simply questioning how DFO is managing a public resource. Its the right, in fact duty of citizens to question their governments action. I don' t believe commercial prawning needs to be shut down, but I would like to know why, for example, pulse fishing is required to protect the stock, yet the commercial fisheries don't have similar restrictions? I'd like to know if our resource is being well managed, why does it seem scarcer?
I agree with you the board should be used for a respectfull exchange of ideas, unfortuntunately some people are incapable of making a point without personal attacks or grandstanding. Those folks add little to any discussion

I'd echo this statement %100..
would also add a thanks to gamechanger for not being lead into the gutter..

 

[KV1]

I'd echo this statement %100..
would also add a thanks to gamechanger for not being lead into the gutter..

Next you will be saying the governments is not corruptible. Now that's a joke.

 

[Hot Rods]

Thought it might be appropriate to post the contents of the SFAB proposal that was presented at the recent prawn meeting. Your committee even offer up additional restrictions on the recreational sector in lieu of winter closures and contingent on some changes to commercial fishing practices. I have to do this in two posts because of length.

Sport Fishing Advisory Board Proposals for Management options in formulating the 2015 Draft Prawn IFMP
Executive Summary; The SFAB prefers to find a means of managing Prawn fisheries in a sustainable and equitable manner for 1st Nations, recreational, and commercial sectors rather than proceed to request more implementation of ”First Nations FSC and Recreational Harvest Reserves” throughout the coast. At this point in time, in many areas surrounding coastal communities, opportunities for a realistic anticipation of harvest are severely hampered by the current system of management. As a result of the current management direction, the Canadian Public is not being allowed to optimize its access. We understand how the fishery can be managed sustainably and conservatively by using the current spawner index system, and fully understand that all fisheries are impacting the ability of the department to manage fisheries considering the increase in effort by all sectors throughout the coast; however, changes need to occur. The SFAB considers the change does not need to be complicated and as we have stated for years; the commercial and recreational sectors need to be managed to a differential in order to allow for meaningful opportunities throughout the year for 1st
Detailed SFAB Proposals:
nations FSC and for the public recreational fishery. Additionally the differential management described should have 3 different regimes throughout the coast. Additional management measures will be described to enhance a sustainable and equitable management regime.
A. Spawner Index differential Management: 1. Coast -wide: (This refers to areas outside the areas subject to fall spawner index testing) The SFAB suggests that the recreational sector be managed at 110% of base index and Commercial at 130% of base index (increase of .7 - .8 female necessary per trap over a 24 hour period for July) This should allow stocks to regain and maintain strength in most coastal areas and make for a better commercial fishery especially in areas where remoteness and safety issues mean little recreational use.
2. Important Areas near Coastal Communities: These include all sub areas in South Coast waters near Coastal population centers where Fall Spawner Index sampling takes place and subsequently recreational fisheries may be closed for the winter. The SFAB suggests a differential of 25 points as a starting point
At this time the areas are: Howe Sound and Indian Arm, Powell River, Malaspina Strait / lower Jervis, Nanaimo (north) and Nootka sub areas.
for any sub-area where the Public fishery has been closed through the winter due to spawner index testing in the fall.
The 15 point differential in index management currently being utilized becomes eroded quickly if for some reason the commercial sector breaches their management level: the 25 point differential may allow for some security that recreational opportunities may be able to continue through the year. If 1st Nations FSC access is being unduly hampered in some of these sub-areas while using traditional gear, it may be acceptable to raise both the commercial and recreational indexes to allow for adequate harvest for FSC needs while not breaching the conservation base index. This could mean the recreational sector would be managed at a suggested 115% of base level and the commercial at 140% of base level or higher.
2
Additionally if the public fishery continues to be closed in the winter despite increasing the differential, the SFAB requests that the differential continue to be increased until a potential for a full season could be reasonably expected.
It is also understood that it may be necessary to find means within the recreational tool box to restrict impacts on the resource in the fall and winter in order to maintain these openings over winter. These management measures, however, must be agreed upon between the SFAB and the department and potential options are listed below.
We also suggest, as part of any increase in managing the recreational sector over the 110% level and/or further recreational restrictions through management options; that 1st Nations be part of the solution by managing their FSC Fisheries more rigorously in these critical areas. This could take the form of a separate index level, restricting use of commercial vessels; caps on trap limits, or pulsing etc. 3. High Use Areas: The high use areas of Saanich Inlet, Stuart Channel and Alberni Inlet have been managed to a much higher level than other areas since 2007 with some successes and failures. Intent was to double the spawners in Jan/Feb but did not meet general success in that objective.
This 9 point plan included the commercial and recreational fisheries managed at a 15 point differential in index levels (commercial sector managed in July at 150% of base index and the recreational sector at 135% of base index). In many cases, this differential is not sufficient and the SFAB suggests this differential should be 30% or more.
Not all of these “High Use Areas” have the same effort levels occurring; thus flexibility in management levels could be discussed.
Additionally, since both the commercial and recreational sectors are being managed to higher spawner Index, it will be necessary for 1st Nations to agree to manage these areas for FSC opportunity to an index level that will allow for sustainable fisheries in these areas. The continued use by First Nations of commercial vessels for 365 days/year without trap limits or caps is not sustainable over the long term.
As a general statement; support for any continuation of, and or, further restrictions on recreational prawn harvesters in these “High Use Areas” is contingent on reduction of effort by other sectors.

 

[Hot Rods]

Here is the remainder:



B. Associated Management Considerations:
1. The SFAB also suggests that consideration be given to a form of Area Based management for the commercial Prawn fishery. Currently there is little consideration by many vessels for the coastal communities and their local fisheries since commercial vessels are free to fish the entire coast. Area based fishery may serve to create a more cooperative relationship between the three sectors. Understandably it will not solve all issues.
2. As suggested over the past few years, The SFAB requests the department to consider Managing Stuart Channel as a Special Management Area in the same manner as Howe Sound, Saanich Inlet and Alberni Inlet. This would include managing Stuart Channel to a half trap regime.
3. We would also ask the department consider managing the commercial fishery to a trap cap as part of the Special Management Area Management Regime. If Howe Sound needs to be exempt from this consideration, since a study area; then consider the cap for the “High Use Areas”.
3
Currently, with the open run and gun style commercial fishery, a trap limit itself does not protect these areas from being inundated with commercial vessels as has been witnessed in Alberni Inlet. Trap limits and caps could be an effective tool for managing the commercial fishery in other areas such as Nootka Sound, Sechelt, and Campbell River areas since they are subject to extra effort by commercial vessels.
4. The SFAB requests the Department to remove the “first week of the commercial season” closure of the recreational fishery as part of the management regime for the “High Use Areas” unless there is agreement to manage the “High Use Areas” to a considerably higher index differential between the recreational and commercial sectors. The one week closure is not a needed measure and in reality is just another measure to restrict recreational access.
5. Pulsing is likely the most important contribution the recreational sector has accepted in the past as our contribution to the resource in the “High Use areas”, however, it seems the recreational sector is the only sector facing harvest restrictions of any significant amount. Discontinuing pulsing for 2015 IFMP now has to be considered by the SFAB if significant changes are not planned for this year in these “High Use Areas”.
6. If Fall Spawner Index Surveys indicate the management index level is likely to be breached then the SFAB requests that options to closures, as listed in the IFMP, be discussed with the SFAB for an agreed upon option. The IFMP’s state: “Data is reviewed by DFO fishery managers and Science staff by conference call. If the results are at or below the baseline spawner index level for that month, then the area is closed. If samples are consistently greater than baseline + 10%, the area remains open. Areas with index values between the baseline spawner index level and baseline + 10% are considered for reduced fishing effort , such as partial weekly closures, or are closed. Baseline + 35% is applied to the high use areas (Section 4.1.1). Data is considered first on a Subarea basis, then with respect to patterns in the overall sampling area. Adjacent areas are also closed if they are logical extensions of the area sampled, or are required to simplify enforceability of the closure boundaries”.
The SFAB proposes that where the spawner survey index lies between the Baseline and the management regime index then the department should consider the options that are listed in the IFMP statement above, and or, other management options available. The only option the department chooses at this time is to close the fishery. It cannot be overstated that the reason for the management index being breached in the fall is due to extractions by all sectors through the spring and summer, yet the recreational sector seems to be the sector most affected.
7. Without prejudice and with a proviso that the commercial sector will be managed to an agreed upon differential (as discussed above) in these areas subject to winter closures for the recreational community (with or without Laroque funding for continued fall surveys); we list other potential options besides winter closures that could be discussed:
NOTE –These will need further approval through the SFAB process before signing off as potential options.
a. Risk Manage these areas by introducing an annual recreational catch limit: SFAB has already passed a motion for a 4,000 annual limit for Prawn to be attached to the recreational license: This could be applied in concert with one or more of the following options. b. Risk Manage some or all of these areas by pulse fishing of the recreational fishery Oct 31 – March 1. This would have the same effect as a complete closure as would remove gear from the water for 2 months plus would deter those who may fish continually. c. Risk Manage some or all of these areas by non-retention of berried female prawns.
4
d. Risk Manage some or all of these areas by eliminating over night soaking in these areas for the period Jan 1 to March 31.
e. There is also an option available instead of increasing the commercial index in some management areas; that is establishing First Nations FSC - Recreational Harvest Reserves in sub areas that have traditionally experienced winter recreational closures. These have already been requested for: Saanich Inlet, a portion of Alberni Inlet (sub-area 23-1), 2 sub-areas near Sechelt (16-1 and 2) sub-areas of Nootka (25-16 and 25-8 above Mozino Point, and Hisnit Bay in 25-4).
Without the potentially overwhelming impact of the commercial gear; such an option would allow the department, recreational, and 1st Nations communities to work together and devise an index survey methodology that would be relevant to the recreational fishery style and satisfy the department that further precautionary measures could be put in place if necessary. It is understood that where 1st Nations have an interest they should be full partners in this venture. An additional benefit to the 1st Nations FSC – Recreational Harvest Areas could be to test the direct relationship of commercial removals to impacts on fall index survey results. In other words, if there was no commercial prawn fishing in an area such as 16-1, despite fishing by other sectors; would the fall indexing indicate a necessity to close the recreational fishery?
We also suggest the department include a notation in the IFMP that changes may be implemented in Season if agreements have not been made in a working group atmosphere in time for the Final IFMP being issued. Should agreement not be made within the working group, we also request the department issue the same statement to allow the department to act in 2015 (should a departmental decision have to be implemented).
Respectfully;
SFAB Prawn Representatives